Austin- hmmm in his 'Stone Cold' persona I'd say some of the overly brawling aspects of his matches weren't terrific, I can only think of Backlash 2002 v Taker where they spend a vast portion of the match brawling and it really didn't look or feel that special/memorable. I know Cal will probably be in disagreement there but bar his matches being overbooked at times and the brawling not always being enthralling I can't think of too much to really criticise. In WCW he got really really good around '94 but it wasn't like he was bad prior to that, just outshined by Arn, Eaton, Rude and Zbyszko etc.

Funk- well shit this is even harder to criticise, I can only say that maybe people would be bored by the more realistic/organic environment his matches produce, like I adore his punches and punch drunk selling but if people prefer 100mph sprints with insane spots and athleticism then Funk really won't appeal to them. Its hardly a knock on Funk since I'm thankful to God he never went down that road/style and its certainly something I'd never agree with if someone said he was boring, but well trying to find things Funk did badly/wrong isn't exactly an easy feat so I'm having to scrounge for something.

Benoit- by about 2005 onwards I did think he got overly formulaic with his offence and set ups for signature spots, he could still 'go' when he wanted to even in his later years but I think there's a world of difference between 2006 Benoit v Finlay and then 2006 Benoit v someone who works totally different to Finlay and Regal etc. I'm still largely a fan of his junior stuff since he and Eddie in particularly always seemed to be a step above the rest when it came to building their matches and making their spots mean much more in the context of the match, but I'm sure a few of his junior matches in WCW and NJPW may not hold up as well if I were to rewatch them tomorrow: though that's about as likely to happen because of my growing abhorance to the junior style than Benoit himself. Not really a fan of him in his matches v Angle either, felt he went along with Angle's counter counter style and didn't impose his ability to structure matches around mind blowing spots like he could do with Eddie or Mysterio for example.

Lawler- fuck youuuuuuuuuuuuu for making me think of something bad about Lawler. Ok, not an amazing athlete and 95% of his offence is great looking punches, so yeah if you don't appreciate the detail and story behind a basic match formula then Lawler will likely bore you or leave you thinking you're just not seeing what everyone else is seeing.

Flair- tendancy to oversell, though I'm not in the camp that hates that since it usually played a big part in getting him heat/babyface support on his opponent and made for a great build to his desperation transition spot and was an essential part of the Flair formula in making his opponent look like gold. People will say if you've seen 1 Flair match you've seen them all, total bollocks to me of course but I can understand why people will look for a more diverse performer (though again Flair is about as diverse as they come throughout his career). His matches with Windham and Steamboat are basic matches in terms of moves and execution, though of course its the subtle build, engaging atmosphere and character dynamics which add so much more to the sequences but again, if people are looking for an athlete to leave them speechless Ric Flair isn't who you go to.

Wow. Great write ups.

"I am the devil himself, and all of you, stupid, mindless people fell for it". ~

I liked HHH/Orton at WM25 for what it was. I agree with the points already made about the booking aspect of it, but as a match, it was solid from what I recall. I also think it got hurt by having Take/Michaels go on before it, just took the crowd out of it.

I re-watched both Taker/Michaels WM matches back to back last night and I still prefer 25 to 26. Without going in to a big thing about it since it'll prob be overlooked anyway, the "feel" of 25 felt more "authentic" to me. The rematch just couldn't draw me in at all. Not saying it's a bad match or anything, because it was really good, but not better than 25 imo. If i'm putting ratings on it, i'd go:

WM25: **** 1/2
WM26: *** 1/2 - 3/4ish

With that done, I'm gonna finish TLC 09, then hopefully my copy of Royal Rumble 2010 will come in and I'll start that, already got Elimination Chamber 2010. Prob gonna order some more 2010 shows later since i'm missing a good bit.

Watched The Epic Journey Of Dwayne Johnson and loved it. The documentary could have been longer but it was still good. The match selection was also not bad at all. I would have left off the match with Hogan at NWO 2003 but they did need a Hollywood Rock match so it works.

I am now impatiently waiting for Edge's new DVD set to come out in April.

The feud called for a violent match, it needed it to get into a brawl for it to actually work. They absolutely just handcuffed both guys by making that stupid stipulation. The feud was actually really, really good, full of action, ready for a really great Wrestlemania payoff, and it just didnt happen...through no fault of Orton or Triple H.

People often critisise overbooked matches but in this case it was needed. The feud wasnt just Orton/Triple H it was Legacy/Orton/McMahons/Triple H. Legacy run ins were expected and needed, a Shane or Vince run in was needed, and Stephanie making an appearance would have been even better. People expected and wanted these run ins in this case, they expected a swerve and what they got was...dissapointing because as Clique stated you were left with that 'was that it' feeling as the match eneded. Very underwhelming.

I think the match as was would not get the hate it got and it happen before the Undertaker/Shawn Michaels match. I am be in the minority but I liked how the DQ & count out stipulations where added to the match because the one thing the McMahons and Triple H did not want was Orton winning the WWE Championship. So knowing that Orton wanted to put Triple H in the toughest spot possible " Do I end this guy for what he did to my family or do I wrestle him and try to keep the title?"

Undertaker v Shawn Michaels WM 25 is the greatest Wrestlemaina match for me. It's a ***** for me. I didn't like their match at WM 26 and I have it at ***3/4. Maybe my expectations were just too damn high the second time around.

I wouldn't call Hogan/Warrior a terrible match. At all. Was pretty good tbh, especially considering you've got someone who is total shit and Ultimate Warrior... . Hogan did an amazing job getting Warrior through that match without it turning into a fucking disaster.

Hogan/Andre is probably the absolute worst WM main event of all time. It can have as much significance as it wants but its still a god awful match that nobody ever needs to see. There are plenty of clips of the slam going around .

The worst of the worst for WM main events are Hogan/Bundy, Miz/Cena, Yoko/Hogan, Sid/Hogan and LT/Bam Bam. Bret/Yoko at 9 & 10 aren't that good either. Orton/HHH, Jericho/HHH and Batista/HHH are so-so/underwhelming.

Hogan/Andre is not a good match but I get chills at that stare down and the slam is still a sight to see 25 years later.